Almost any game by Lasker or Capablanca could be studied with profit, in the hope of playing a little more like our heroes. Their games are full of common sense. But the modernists and hypermodernists like Alekhin are not so easy to learn from; they thrive on a different style of chess, being less interested in the elegant harmony of principles and more interested in complexity, conflict and contradiction. Alekhin’s chess can be admired, but it is not easily imitated!
Nunn comments on Alekhin:
“I first came across Alekhine’s collection of games when I was about 11 years old. Up to that point, I had been quite successful in junior events and I had the feeling that chess wasn’t really a very difficult game. After playing over all 220 games in the first two volumes (covering the periods 1905-23 and 1924-37), I thought “How can anyone play like this? It’s just impossible to see so much during a game!”. I was particularly struck by his game against Rubinstein from Semmering, 1926 (game 42 in this book), and the move 15…Nxf2! in particular. It seemed incredible that there might be a stronger move than the obvious recapture on c3, but after having checked the analysis several times, I had to admit that taking on f2 was a forced win. But how did this move even enter Alekhine’s head? Today, finding this combination doesn’t seem so totally impossible as it did then, but it remains an enormously impressive game. In my opinion Alekhine’s special genius lay in his ability to discover unexpected twists in positions where a lesser player would have made an automatic, conventional move. Other examples of such twists, in addition to the 15…Nxf2 mentioned above, are the move 19 Qc7! in game 31 and the idea of 18 dxe5 and 19 Qf4! in game 47.” John Nunn
And here’s Bobby FIscher on Alekhin:
“His style worked for him, but it could scarcely work for anybody else. His conceptions were gigantic, full of outrageous and unprecedented ideas. … His play was fantastically complicated, more so than any player before or since. … At the chessboard, he radiated a furious tension that often intimidated his opponents.”
But he played many games, and wrote throughout his life, and in fact there is much that is instructive about his play. But the lessons are not always easy.
Opening
Alekhin played every opening with relish and invention, including the hypermodern Grunfeld Defence and the defence to which he gave his name. Never for Alekhin automatic development or routine captures; he strove to find the most accurate and challenging moves at every turn.
And a vigorous win from the opening against a notable opening theorist (indeed, a lot of the theory of the Slav can be traced back to games between these players).
Middlegame
I’ve chosen contrasting Alekhin games: one illustrating a solid grip on the game, showing many simple positional themes in a clear form, and two sprawling messes, apparently pushed forward mostly by Alekhin’s formidable will to win.
Two of Alekhin’s most celebrated brilliancies.
Click […] to choose a game
Endgame
So, Alekhin’s chess is not easy, but in the endgame, some welcome clarity can appear. Here’s a celebrated annotation, explaining how to squeeze a win by coming up with a plan:
And an endgame against a more formidable opponent, which has been much discussed in the books as a model of how to win with an outside passed pawn in a Rook endgame — it all depends on having your Rook behind the passed pawn. Well worth playing out against a peer or a computer.